State v. Nichter, 2015 Ohio 3489

In 2011 Daniel J. Nichter pled guilty to three counts of second-degree felony identity fraud and was sentenced to prison.
Nichter moved for judicial release in 2012; the trial court denied the motion but said it would reconsider after one year served.
In 2013 Nichter renewed his motion; the trial court granted judicial release. The State appealed and this court reversed for failure to follow R.C. 2929.20.
On remand the trial court again granted judicial release; the State appealed as of right under R.C. 2953.08(B)(3).
The issue on appeal was whether the trial court complied with R.C. 2929.20(J) — i.e., made the two required findings and analyzed the relevant R.C. 2929.12 factors (both those favoring and disfavoring release) and listed them on the record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court made the required R.C. 2929.20(J)(1) findings before granting judicial release for second-degree felonies	The court failed to make the two statutory findings on the record as required; grant was contrary to law	Trial court read statutory language and cited some factors indicating low recidivism, which was sufficient	Reversed: trial court did not make the required findings and thus did not comply with R.C. 2929.20(J)
Whether the trial court analyzed all relevant R.C. 2929.12 factors (both recidivism and seriousness factors)	Court considered only R.C. 2929.12(E) (factors indicating lower recidivism) and failed to consider 2929.12(D), (B), (C) — insufficient analysis	Trial court relied on its statement that the offense was “not the most serious form” and cited some mitigating factors	Reversed: court failed to analyze and list all relevant 2929.12 factors and applied an improper standard regarding seriousness
Whether the court should instead be ordered to deny release because the record cannot support the required findings	State asked for an entry denying release because record lacked support for statutory findings	Nichter sought to preserve the grant or allow the trial court to reconsider on remand	Denied: appellate court remanded for the trial court to conduct proceedings complying with R.C. 2929.20(J) rather than ordering denial

State v. Williams, 2010-Ohio-4519 (discussing standard of review and obligation to justify R.C. 2929.20 findings)
State v. Nichter, 2014-Ohio-4226 (this court’s prior reversal of the trial court’s earlier grant for failure to make statutory findings)
State v. Orms, 2014-Ohio-2732 (trial court must justify R.C. 2929.20 findings with analysis of R.C. 2929.12 factors)